TayoBlog

Starting in January 2008, I  will be beginning a new research project at the University of Cape Town in the study of Islam. The project is dedicated to a critical and comparative study of Muslim publics in different parts of Africa since the end of the Cold War. For the purpose of this project, a Muslim public is a discursive space formed by multiple and competing interventions on a variety of topics through texts (written and oral), gestures, rituals, organizations, institutions and multiple media. A Muslim Public is a form of public sphere.

The project has identified three countries and three key aspects of Muslim publics for detailed investigations. The countries chosen are South Africa, Tanzania and Ghana, representing three key regions of Africa south of the Sahara. In each country, the research will focus on three broad aspects of Muslim publics: agents, media, and effects.

The present and future of Muslim publics will be in the spotlight of our contemporary world for some time to come. This research takes a broader analytical view to map the possibilities and the threats that emerge from developments within religious groups, and the constraints that are imposed from without. Using the framework of of Muslim publics within broader public spheres, and focussing on agents, sites and effects, the research will help us to appreciate the past and anticipate the future.

For more information, please visit www.uct.ac.za/depts/religion, or write to me Abdulkader.Tayob@uct.ac.za 

In the last 10 days, I have enjoyed the honour and distinction of speaking at 2 wedding ceremonies: one in the Northwest Province and one in the Western Province. These are two regions in South Africa. I am not usually invited to speak at these events, and I am myself reluctant to do so. Speaking at weddings, especially at Muslim ones, can be quite a challenging task which I prefer to leave to those more competent than me. Since the first was my sister's son, and the second my only cousin's daughter in Cape town, I agreed. I enjoyed every minute of it!

Sitting back, I have had the chance to think more carefully about these events. I realize that I should have done more of the thinking before the events. I did that, but now there is some opportunity to reflect in the aftermath!

Anyway, I raised questions about traditions at these weddings. At the first event, I pointed out that the relentless rejection of traditions breaks down the social bonds that binds people in a community or society. Especially in Muslim societies, I was targeting those who regularly attack social traditions because they do not conform to strict adherence to the Prophetic model. Without realizing the implications of this puritan drive, such approaches eventually break the ties that bind people. And marriage ceremonies, and especially its traditons, reinforce these social bonds. Perhaps traditions must change, I conceded, but they can only be rejected at the risk of greater social peril.

On another occasion, I found myself taking a slightly different approach. Some quick observers told me that that I was contradicting myself. On this occasion, I reminded Aishah, the bride of my nephew, Muhammad, that had she been a bride 30 or 40 years ago, she might have heard advice about how to serve her husband, please him to the best of her ability, etc. I read a passage from the great Muslim scholar al-Ghazzali to the same effect. But I tried to point out, in unequivocal terms, that she not follow this tradition. Even in 2007, the women in the audience laughed at me for even suggesting that they would take al-Ghazali seriously. I did not want to take any chances.

At the third and last occasion, I was running out of ideas. But I managed to focus on the importance of building an honest relationship in a marriage for which I quoted the great poet, Rumi. The quote is worth repeating:

If you perceive a fault in your companion, the fault which you perceive in him (or her) is within yourself. The wise is like a mirror in which you see your own image, for "The believer is the mirror of his fellow believer.' Get rid of that fault in you, for what distresses you in him distresses you in yourself.

For me, the relationship between two persons was most important and needed nurturing in a marriage.

Of course, I said much more on these occasion that I am relating in this blog!

At the last wedding proceeded to a close, I began thinking about the kind of traditions and symbols that pervade SA Muslim ceremonies. Societies and individuals are rapidly changing, but the traditions remain quite fixed in their broad, general outline. And that outline depicts the delivery of the bride to the family of the husband! As the last event came to a close, a beautiful song including a melodious salutation to the Prophet was rendered by the presiding Imam and about 3 or 4 men. The bride, with tears in her eyes, greeted her mother, her aunts and then her father. She was then received by her husband and his family!

The irony of this last event is that the young couple will be living in a granny flat of the bride's parents! So much for delivery of the hapless bride to her in-laws. And in the first wedding, my nephew and his bride were already married in court about a year ago. Both had been regularly visiting my sister over the last year!

My point is that social relations have been changing rapidly over the years, but the ceremonies pretended that nothing had changed. The pretence did not stop at the ceremonies. Society happily pretended that marriage was about families coming together. And family regularly delivered their daughters to their new families.

In reality, in South Africa at least. two individuals were joined in marriage at these ceremonies. Thinking about these experiences, Rumi's advise was probably most important in the circumstances.

Prof. Benatar at UCT's Philosophy Department has certainly sparked off intense debate with his inaugural lecture on Affirmative Action. The lecture and the discussion that came in its wake has produced a lot of heat, if not always light. But it has opened up a number of issues for a University in South Africa.

In his argument against Prof. Benatar's criticism against UCT policy, vice-chancellor Martin Hall argued that the policy promotes diversity at the University. Whilst not clear, this remark is self-evident to South Africans who see the country as diverse, multicultural and rainbow. And yet, this rainbowness has hardly been seriously tested beyond its effect in cultural celebration. What does it mean to have a diverse set of epistemologies? How do cultures produce a different ethos of inquiry at a University? Does this mean that there are multiple truths pursued at the University? Is this true of the soft sciences and possibly not the natural sciences?

Perhaps I am stretching the implication of Prof. Hall's remark, but is this an opportunity to taking up that challenge in a serious way? Whichever position one supports in the AA debate, this particular debate of multiculturalism has its own merit. I hope that students and staff might be interested in taking up this issue as well.

Presently, as many of you know, the question is intensely debated in Europe and the Americas. There, the questions has reopened questions of culture, modernity, religion, and values! The European debate, however, is taking place in the context of a war against terror, aka radical islam, aka islam. There are some who think that this latter issue is ignored by South Africans at their own peril. But for the moment, we might use the opportunity to add our voice to this debate from a different experience. And in the process, begin to look at the tremendous challenges and opportunities we face here.

It is good to see a newspaper (Mail & Guardian) devoting some in-depth articles on religion in (South ) Africa. The focus the past week was clearly on the implications and effects of religion on economics and politics.

But the most interesting developments in South Africa will probably be seen in the field of law. The South African constitution makes significant provisions for relating religions to parliamentary laws. The parliament has passed some laws that directly impact in this field, but the courts have witnessed a lively forum where the issues have been debated.

In the last decade and more, we have seen a fascinating trail of legal judgments on the meaning of religions in society. The judgments makes very interesting reading, and include the meaning of the symbols of religion in a secular society, and the values of religion in competition with the values of the rights-based constitution. The opinions and judgments can be quite easily and freely found on the website of the Constitutionalt Court of South Africa.

My particular interest lies in the relationship between Shariah and South African law. I hope to use this forum to explore some thoughts on this matter. But I do not think that one should forget the broader framework provided by the constitution, and one that emerges in comparative study. In the current global climate, this is easier said than done.